On Dec 5, 2021 at 8:35:30 AM PST, "moviePig" <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:

> On 12/5/2021 11:02 AM, NoBody wrote:
>> On Sat, 4 Dec 2021 11:19:38 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/4/2021 10:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 13:22:26 -0500, Rhino
>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2021-12-03 12:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>> On Dec 1, 2021 at 2:27:43 PM PST, "Ed Stasiak" <edstasiak1067@gmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> RichA
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59499237
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Alec Baldwin says he "didn't pull the trigger" of the gun
>>>>>>>> that fatally wounded cinematographer Halyna Hutchins
>>>>>>>> on the set of his film, Rust.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> ”I would never point a gun at anyone and pull a trigger
>>>>>>>> at them. Never," he told George Stephanopoulos of ABC
>>>>>>>> News.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Except that’s exactly what he did.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It is believed to have discharged when he removed it
>>>>>>>> from a holster during rehearsals for an forthcoming
>>>>>>>> scene.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Guns don’t spontaneously discharge on their own.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> https://www.usacarry.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/7-Transfer-Bar.jpg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "I feel that someone is responsible for what happened and I can't say
>>>>>> who that
>>>>>> is. But I know it's not me... I mean, I honest to God, if I felt that I was
>>>>>> responsible, I might have killed myself."
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Alec Baldwin saying he does not feel guilt over RUST shooting
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Just insane that he actually said these words, in this order, on national
>>>>>> television, about a woman he killed because he didn't bother to check to see
>>>>>> if the gun he was pointing at actual people was loaded.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> If asked, I feel sure he would insist that "it's not my job to check the
>>>>> gun: I'm an actor not an armourer". And most of the public would
>>>>> probably buy that argument....
>>>>
>>>> Why wasn't he asked if he would have put that gun to his head and made
>>>> the same actions if he was so sure it was safe?
>>>
>>> Maybe because, as an interview question it'd be argumentative and
>>> confrontational. Still, it does seem to enclose a valid point.
>>
>> I know that if this was a prominent conservative, the question would
>> have been asked and the whole interview would have hostile in tone.
>
> A "prominent conservative" wouldn't have sat with Stephanopolous.

Because the question would have been asked and the whole interview would have
been hostile in tone.

On 12/5/2021 1:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Dec 5, 2021 at 8:35:30 AM PST, "moviePig" <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/5/2021 11:02 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Sat, 4 Dec 2021 11:19:38 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/4/2021 10:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 13:22:26 -0500, Rhino
>>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2021-12-03 12:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> On Dec 1, 2021 at 2:27:43 PM PST, "Ed Stasiak" <edstasiak1067@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RichA
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59499237
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Alec Baldwin says he "didn't pull the trigger" of the gun
>>>>>>>>> that fatally wounded cinematographer Halyna Hutchins
>>>>>>>>> on the set of his film, Rust.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ”I would never point a gun at anyone and pull a trigger
>>>>>>>>> at them. Never," he told George Stephanopoulos of ABC
>>>>>>>>> News.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Except that’s exactly what he did.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is believed to have discharged when he removed it
>>>>>>>>> from a holster during rehearsals for an forthcoming
>>>>>>>>> scene.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Guns don’t spontaneously discharge on their own.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.usacarry.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/7-Transfer-Bar.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I feel that someone is responsible for what happened and I can't say
>>>>>>> who that
>>>>>>> is. But I know it's not me... I mean, I honest to God, if I felt that I was
>>>>>>> responsible, I might have killed myself."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --Alec Baldwin saying he does not feel guilt over RUST shooting
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just insane that he actually said these words, in this order, on national
>>>>>>> television, about a woman he killed because he didn't bother to check to see
>>>>>>> if the gun he was pointing at actual people was loaded.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If asked, I feel sure he would insist that "it's not my job to check the
>>>>>> gun: I'm an actor not an armourer". And most of the public would
>>>>>> probably buy that argument....
>>>>>
>>>>> Why wasn't he asked if he would have put that gun to his head and made
>>>>> the same actions if he was so sure it was safe?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe because, as an interview question it'd be argumentative and
>>>> confrontational. Still, it does seem to enclose a valid point.
>>>
>>> I know that if this was a prominent conservative, the question would
>>> have been asked and the whole interview would have hostile in tone.
>>
>> A "prominent conservative" wouldn't have sat with Stephanopolous.
>
> Because the question would have been asked and the whole interview would have
> been hostile in tone.

As my statement is true, yours is moot.

Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>On 2021-12-04 1:35 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>On 2021-12-03 2:50 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
>>>>Rhino <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>On 2021-12-03 12:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote:

>>>>>>"I feel that someone is responsible for what happened and I can't say
>>>>>>who that is. But I know it's not me... I mean, I honest to God, if I
>>>>>>felt that I was responsible, I might have killed myself."

>>>>>> --Alec Baldwin saying he does not feel guilt over RUST shooting

>>>>>>Just insane that he actually said these words, in this order, on
>>>>>>national television, about a woman he killed because he didn't bother
>>>>>>to check to see if the gun he was pointing at actual people was loaded.

>>>>>If asked, I feel sure he would insist that "it's not my job to check the
>>>>>gun: I'm an actor not an armourer". And most of the public would
>>>>>probably buy that argument....

>>>>Rhino, I certainly hope the public aren't that deluded.

>>>>By definition: The crown prince, as a little boy growing up, can do no
>>>>wrong. So if the prince misbehaves, there's another little boy who gets
>>>>whipped.

>>>That's precisely the origin of the concept of the "whipping boy".

>>That's why the example occurred to me. I think it will occur to most of
>>the public too. I don't agree with you.

>Huh? I'm not disagreeing with YOU, I'm just observing that this concept
>has the name "whipping boy".

I don't think most of the public will believe that Baldwin had no
criminal liability, given that he was well aware that he was being
handed a working gun.

>By the way, as questionable as this concept seems at first, some real
>psychology went into it. While the person of the royal was considered
>(literally) untouchable, the obvious fact that the whipping boy was
>innocent was supposed to deter the prince (and possible future king)
>from being bad again because he didn't want to see an innocent child
>punished for what he himself had done. It's still a raw deal for the
>whipping boy though!

>I wonder if there is any reliable historical evidence that the use of
>the whipping boy actually DID deter the prince from future misdeeds?

Interesting. So it's like the drill sergeant punishing all the trainees
for one failing to complete a task, or a coach making the whole team run
laps for one guy failing to try hard enough in practice. Unit cohesion
building, probably going back to the Romans.

I wonder if that does work to induce sympathy.

>>>>Alec Baldwin is a responsible adult but he's behaving like one
>>>>of the elite, that he's too important to be responsible for the
>>>>consequences of the harm he's caused.

>>>>Most of us have worked on job sites and have been told that some of the
>>>>equipment, if one isn't paying proper attention, can be deadly. On a
>>>>production line, if workers are maintaining it, you cannot see the
>>>>entire line from one end to the other. So there's a lever that controls
>>>>the breaker. When the break is off, the lever is in a position that it
>>>>lines up with another bar and holes that align are drilled through both.
>>>>Each maintenance worker has a key lock that he puts through the holes.
>>>>Only he keeps the key. If six workers are maintaining the line, there
>>>>are six locks on the bar. As each maintenance worker comes off the line,
>>>>he unlocks and removes the lock. Only when there are no workers in
>>>>maintenance can the lever be thrown and the circuit become live.

>>>>No one would ever just yell out, "No workers on the line!" to the guy
>>>>about to reset the breaker and turn the line back on.

>>>>At a job site, each and every worker is separately responsible for
>>>>safety on the job. The responsibility cannot be shifted, not even if one
>>>>is an actor on a movie production.

>>>I'm fully agreed that Baldwin SHOULD be held responsible for that gun's
>>>discharge; I'm just not 100% sure he will be. If the prosecutor and
>>>judge have strong Leftist inclinations and the jury is hand-selected to
>>>contain no one that knows anything about gun safety basics, some version
>>>of "I'm not responsible because neutering the gun was someone else's
>>>job" MAY just persuade the jury. That would be a crying shame but I
>>>wouldn't rule it out.

>>Where do you get politics?

>EVERYTHING is political, whether it should be or not. Look at these DA's
>that Soros has helped put in office who are letting rioters, arsonists
>go when they blind police officers, burn down buildings (sometimes with
>people inside), etc.

Different rules of ethics apply to judges. If a judge had a conflict of
interest like that, that he was unable to apply the law fairly to a
defendant for having some political connection to him, then he must
recuse himself.

>>If anything, leftist politics would make it
>>MORE likely that Baldwin is held criminally responsible as 1) he injured
>>and killed another worker and 2) to a large extent, he's management,
>>especially in his blame-shifting attempts.

>Baldwin seems to be beloved by the Left for his frequent attacks on
>Trump. I can well imagine this cutting him a lot of slack.

Uh, Rhino, what with the narcissism and blame-shifting, he's still playing
Trump, or rather, when he was playing Trump, it was a version of himself.

>>The prosecutor must not allow politics to intrude. That's hugely
>>unethical and would get him disbarred.

>I hope you're right but forgive me if I don't bank on it.

>>You can't expect the jury to know
>>anything about gun safety. This is the purpose of calling an expert
>>witness.

>I agree but if the prosecutor is incompetent - or wants to tilt the
>scales in Baldwin's favour - he might call an "expert" that isn't very
>compelling to the jury.

I'm sure the county prosecutor is a Republican. There are politics you
are trying to ignore here.

The Horny Goat <lcraver@home.ca> wrote:
>Sat, 4 Dec 2021 20:35:58 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>>They only difference I see is one was an accidental shooting and one was
>>a spree killing. In both cases, people legally responsible for gun
>>safety didn't give a shit about gun safety. In both cases, the person
>>with legal responsibility handed the gun to someone who could not be
>>trusted to handle a gun safety.

>>Why yes, the parents are actually at fault, like the armorer and the
>>assistant director.

>At the end of the day the primary responsibility is the person holding
>the gun.

Of course! That's why criminal liability is shared among the three
people who personally held that gun! That includes the assistant
director who yelled out "cold gun" handing it to Baldwin, which would be
criminally reckless behavior in my opinion. To prove a manslaughter, the
prosecution must prove that the bad conduct was criminally reckless.

That Baldwin aimed and fired is criminal assault (or battery) with a
deadly weapon.

I'm not sure what the armorer can be charged with, but probably the same
thing the assistant director might be charged with. She had a legal duty
to supervise those weapons. I guess that duty is defined in the criminal
code but I haven't looked.

On Sun, 5 Dec 2021 13:07:28 -0500, Rhino
<no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:

>Is it? I'm not disputing what you're saying; it tends to match my
>experience. But maybe we haven't led typical lives. The reason I say
>that is that I saw statistics a few years back that said gun ownership
>per capita in Canada is nearly as high as in the US. When I saw that, I
>found myself wondering if I just happened to move in circles that were
>more leery about guns than the average Canadian is....

It's clear there is a huge disconnect in Canada between the rate of
gun ownership in rural vs urban settings. That's a big part of why the
Saskatchewan Bouchie case was so controversial - urban folks just
didn't understand why farmer Bouchie was so armed.

In his case he was 1/2 hour from any possibility of police service and
of course a few times a year had to deal with wild animals (I don't
mean the two legged kind)

Bouchie claimed he was firing a 'warning shot' with what turned out to
be the killing blow. I'm skeptical but no question he was acquitted of
murder. His detractors don't really have a good answer to 'what
innocent intent could the dead man and his friends entering the farm
after dark?' but in this day of "mostly peaceful protestors" if you're
black or aboriginal it seems that in some people's eyes at least you
have the right to do anything including entering someone's property
after dark. From Bouchie's point of view it was obvious they were
trying to steal his truck.

In article <4a9rJ.59511$Bu7.1837@fx26.iad>,
moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:

> On 12/5/2021 1:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> > On Dec 5, 2021 at 8:35:30 AM PST, "moviePig" <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On 12/5/2021 11:02 AM, NoBody wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 4 Dec 2021 11:19:38 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On 12/4/2021 10:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
> >>>>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 13:22:26 -0500, Rhino
> >>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On 2021-12-03 12:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Dec 1, 2021 at 2:27:43 PM PST, "Ed Stasiak"
> >>>>>>> <edstasiak1067@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> RichA
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59499237
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Alec Baldwin says he "didn't pull the trigger" of the gun
> >>>>>>>>> that fatally wounded cinematographer Halyna Hutchins
> >>>>>>>>> on the set of his film, RUST.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> "I would never point a gun at anyone and pull a trigger
> >>>>>>>>> at them. Never," he told George Stephanopoulos of ABC
> >>>>>>>>> News.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Except that's exactly what he did.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> It is believed to have discharged when he removed it
> >>>>>>>>> from a holster during rehearsals for an forthcoming
> >>>>>>>>> scene.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Guns don't spontaneously discharge on their own.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://www.usacarry.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/7-Transfer-Bar.
> >>>>>>>> jpg
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> "I feel that someone is responsible for what happened and I can't
> >>>>>>> say who that is. But I know it's not me... I mean, I honest to
> >>>>>>> God, if I felt that I was responsible, I might have killed myself."
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --Alec Baldwin saying he does not feel guilt over RUST
> >>>>>>> shooting
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Just insane that he actually said these words, in this order, on
> >>>>>>> national television, about a woman he killed because he didn't
> >>>>>>> bother to check to see if the gun he was pointing at actual people
> >>>>>>> was loaded.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> If asked, I feel sure he would insist that "it's not my job to check
> >>>>>> the gun: I'm an actor not an armourer". And most of the public would
> >>>>>> probably buy that argument....
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why wasn't he asked if he would have put that gun to his head and
> >>>>> made the same actions if he was so sure it was safe?
> >>>>
> >>>> Maybe because, as an interview question it'd be argumentative and
> >>>> confrontational. Still, it does seem to enclose a valid point.
> >>>
> >>> I know that if this was a prominent conservative, the question would
> >>> have been asked and the whole interview would have hostile in tone.
> >>
> >> A "prominent conservative" wouldn't have sat with Stephanopolous.
> >
> > Because the question would have been asked and the whole interview would
> > have
> > been hostile in tone.
>
> As my statement is true, yours is moot.

Nope. If the media hadn't cemented its reputation for being in the bag
for Democrats and leftists, more conservatives would sit down with them
if they knew the interviews would be fair.

On 12/5/2021 12:54 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
> On Dec 5, 2021 at 8:35:30 AM PST, "moviePig" <pwallace@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/5/2021 11:02 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>> On Sat, 4 Dec 2021 11:19:38 -0500, moviePig <pwallace@moviepig.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/4/2021 10:42 AM, NoBody wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 3 Dec 2021 13:22:26 -0500, Rhino
>>>>> <no_offline_contact@example.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2021-12-03 12:50 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> On Dec 1, 2021 at 2:27:43 PM PST, "Ed Stasiak" <edstasiak1067@gmail.com>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> RichA
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59499237
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Alec Baldwin says he "didn't pull the trigger" of the gun
>>>>>>>>> that fatally wounded cinematographer Halyna Hutchins
>>>>>>>>> on the set of his film, Rust.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> ”I would never point a gun at anyone and pull a trigger
>>>>>>>>> at them. Never," he told George Stephanopoulos of ABC
>>>>>>>>> News.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Except that’s exactly what he did.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is believed to have discharged when he removed it
>>>>>>>>> from a holster during rehearsals for an forthcoming
>>>>>>>>> scene.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Guns don’t spontaneously discharge on their own.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> https://www.usacarry.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/7-Transfer-Bar.jpg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "I feel that someone is responsible for what happened and I can't say
>>>>>>> who that
>>>>>>> is. But I know it's not me... I mean, I honest to God, if I felt that I was
>>>>>>> responsible, I might have killed myself."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --Alec Baldwin saying he does not feel guilt over RUST shooting
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Just insane that he actually said these words, in this order, on national
>>>>>>> television, about a woman he killed because he didn't bother to check to see
>>>>>>> if the gun he was pointing at actual people was loaded.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If asked, I feel sure he would insist that "it's not my job to check the
>>>>>> gun: I'm an actor not an armourer". And most of the public would
>>>>>> probably buy that argument....
>>>>>
>>>>> Why wasn't he asked if he would have put that gun to his head and made
>>>>> the same actions if he was so sure it was safe?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe because, as an interview question it'd be argumentative and
>>>> confrontational. Still, it does seem to enclose a valid point.
>>>
>>> I know that if this was a prominent conservative, the question would
>>> have been asked and the whole interview would have hostile in tone.
>>
>> A "prominent conservative" wouldn't have sat with Stephanopolous.
>
> Because the question would have been asked and the whole interview would have
> been hostile in tone.

So right wing assholes are afraid of "hostile tones" now or is that just
anonyshits like yourself?

On Wednesday, 1 December 2021 at 16:53:06 UTC-5, RichA wrote:
> https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-59499237

Alec Baldwin's magical self-aiming, self-firing six-shooter:

Actor claims "he didn't pull trigger OR even POINT the gun!" Yet
somehow, it managed to shoot the women in the torso.
For the uninitiated, here is how a single-shot revolver works:
You (generally) raise the gun and point it. You then cock the hammer
back until it clicks into position for firing. You then after suitably aiming
the gun, press the trigger with the LAST digit of your finger and it fires.
If you don't aim it, it can't hit a target, if you don't cock the hammer, you
cannot FIRE the gun.

On Sun, 5 Dec 2021 20:38:09 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<ahk@chinet.com> wrote:

>>At the end of the day the primary responsibility is the person holding
>>the gun.
>
>Of course! That's why criminal liability is shared among the three
>people who personally held that gun! That includes the assistant
>director who yelled out "cold gun" handing it to Baldwin, which would be
>criminally reckless behavior in my opinion. To prove a manslaughter, the
>prosecution must prove that the bad conduct was criminally reckless.

Which is why I'm certain manslaughter charges will be laid. It's ok to
be a doofus - lots of us are from time to time - but when the price of
that is somebody's life that's NOT ok!

>That Baldwin aimed and fired is criminal assault (or battery) with a
>deadly weapon.
>
>I'm not sure what the armorer can be charged with, but probably the same
>thing the assistant director might be charged with. She had a legal duty
>to supervise those weapons. I guess that duty is defined in the criminal
>code but I haven't looked.

Given that such matters are generally handled based on state law I
would assume this is governed by the NM code since it happened in
Sante Fe, NM. If there's any regular here who has any familiarity at
all with that code let them speak up otherwise we're speculating at
best based on other state's rules or upon nothing at all.

I'm mostly surprised there have been no public statements I know of
from the NM state authorities so far given it's 6 weeks. Presumably
they're still investigating but in the absence of information who
knows?

On 12/5/2021 9:10 PM, The Horny Goat wrote:
> On Sun, 5 Dec 2021 20:38:09 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
> <ahk@chinet.com> wrote:
>
>>> At the end of the day the primary responsibility is the person holding
>>> the gun.
>>
>> Of course! That's why criminal liability is shared among the three
>> people who personally held that gun! That includes the assistant
>> director who yelled out "cold gun" handing it to Baldwin, which would be
>> criminally reckless behavior in my opinion. To prove a manslaughter, the
>> prosecution must prove that the bad conduct was criminally reckless.
>
> Which is why I'm certain manslaughter charges will be laid. It's ok to
> be a doofus - lots of us are from time to time - but when the price of
> that is somebody's life that's NOT ok!
>
>> That Baldwin aimed and fired is criminal assault (or battery) with a
>> deadly weapon.
>>
>> I'm not sure what the armorer can be charged with, but probably the same
>> thing the assistant director might be charged with. She had a legal duty
>> to supervise those weapons. I guess that duty is defined in the criminal
>> code but I haven't looked.
>
> Given that such matters are generally handled based on state law I
> would assume this is governed by the NM code since it happened in
> Sante Fe, NM. If there's any regular here who has any familiarity at
> all with that code let them speak up otherwise we're speculating at
> best based on other state's rules or upon nothing at all.
>
> I'm mostly surprised there have been no public statements I know of
> from the NM state authorities so far given it's 6 weeks. Presumably
> they're still investigating but in the absence of information who
> knows?

Charges may be brought, but a conviction will (or at least should)
require showing departure from ordinary de facto industry practice.

edstasiak1067@gmail.com wrote:
> Rhino

>> If asked, I feel sure he would insist that "it's not my job to check the
>> gun: I'm an actor not an armourer". And most of the public would
>> probably buy that argument....
>
>That's what Baldwin's lawyers are hoping for…

Too bad for him everyone on set is given gun safety training from their
guild.

--
Let's go Brandon!